Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ACWI vs ACWX: how they differ

ACWI and ACWX hold 36% of their weight in the same names, and ACWX returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWI and ACWX hold 36% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWI and ACWX both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWIACWX
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa1.73%4.69%
ASML Holding N.V.0.56%1.54%
SK hynix Inc.0.49%1.33%
Tencent Holdings Limited0.39%1.07%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC0.32%0.86%
ASTRAZENECA PLC0.29%0.81%
Alibaba Group Holding Limited0.29%0.79%
Novartis AG0.28%0.77%
SHELL PLC0.27%0.71%
Nestle S.A.0.26%0.72%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA0.25%0.69%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft0.23%0.62%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWIOnly in ACWX
NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.89%CHINESE YUAN HONG KONG 0.01%
APPLE INC. 4.02%Plaza S.A. 0.01%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 2.90%IOI CORPORATION BERHAD 0.01%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 2.58%KRUNG THAI BANK PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED 0.01%
ALPHABET INC. 2.26%Bumrungrad Hospital Public Company Limit 0.01%
BROADCOM INC. 1.90%Jarir Marketing Company SJSC 0.01%
ALPHABET INC. 1.87%KASIKORNBANK PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED 0.01%
META PLATFORMS, INC. 1.34%SCB X PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED 0.01%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026.

ACWI and ACWX on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
ACWX
iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI ACWIMSCI ACWI ex U.S.
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+23.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts+5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.32%
Already in the S&P 50061.4%0.0%
Holdings23071759

ACWI in plain words

ACWI is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.32% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 61% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2307 positions, with the top ten at 24.6%.

ACWX in plain words

ACWX is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI ex U.S.. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +23.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1759 positions, with the top ten at 14.6%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWI or ACWX?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWI returned +19.1% and ACWX returned +23.0%, so ACWX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWI or ACWX?
ACWI charges 0.32% a year and ACWX charges 0.32%, so ACWI is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWI and ACWX overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 61% of ACWI and 0% of ACWX by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 36% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ACWI against ACWX, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACWI against ACWX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ACWI-ACWX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources